Glenn Beck is regarded by 90% of the world population as being unserious, someone to laugh at, make jokes about and treat with the same caution one would employ with a loudmouth drunk hollering about politics from a park bench. The left and moderate right are united in disliking him. I have more than once heard the phrase ‘to go/going chalkboard crazy’ in everyday conversation and this phrase almost certainly owes its existence to Mr Beck’s habit of scratching elaborate theories onto a blackboard in his various podcasts and YouTube shows. Beck’s heavy-handed and manipulative techniques (tearing up at the mere mention of the ‘constitution’ or the ‘troops’) have even led those in the self-declared ‘mainstream’ to question his mental well-being, although as to whether such concern is genuine or sarcastic must vary from person to person.

The media (with the possible exception of Fox News) is unquestionably part of this majority. CNN journalist Michael Wolraich (for example) spoke for millions when he wrote that Beck is “paranoid”, and that he dwells “in a land of make-believe” in which “devious enemies have infiltrated the government and are plotting to destroy America. Every significant phenomenon, from the recession to the BP oil spill, is part of their master plan. Their final objective is a fascist-communist-Big Brother-world-government-über-tyranny, and they will annihilate anyone who interferes, which is why Beck frequently asks listeners to pray for his safety.”

The 10% of the world population to whom the views above do not apply perceive things as differently as can be imagined. They do not regard Mr Beck as a clown or entertainer, but as a prophet, a seer, an Orwell, unappreciated by the majority simply because they are too scared to look at reality with an open mind.

I tend to fall somewhere in-between. I cannot deny that Beck obviously (and I mean obviously) hams up his delivery for cheap emotional effect. Nor can I deny that his willingness to advertise products ranging from vitamin supplements to insurance, gold-cash conversion services to security alarms is highly unorthodox and must count as evidence for his prosecutors.

But against this, I also cannot feign ignorance of the fact that the theories Beck scrawls on his blackboard have a strange tendency to prove accurate, not some of the time, but most of it.

The other day I watched a lengthy video Beck recorded many years ago. In the clip (using his trusty chalkboard) Beck outlines four forces he believes are jostling to decide the human future. The first is the force of progressivism, a loose and broad grouping of the international Left (or in American parlance, ‘liberals’) who have in mind the goal of a benevolent ‘one-world’ government and the abolition of the nation-state. The second force is that of the Globalists, the academic and business elites of the world who also wish to abolish national distinctions, but for largely economic and non-ideological reasons. The third force is the force of Jihad or militant Islam, the stated goal of which is a universal Caliphate, now represented clearly by the Islamic State and its supporters. And finally there is Beck’s preferred force, the Libertarian Conservatives, those who wish to uphold the old moral and national conventions and preserve liberty and the right of self-determination for the individual.

According to Beck (and to common sense) the first three forces are increasingly allied to each other, even though their eventual utopias differ radically. The Progressives sponsor and allow mass immigration, which enables the spread of Islam into the West. The radical Muslims confuse and delegitimise the societies to which they migrate, leading to a cultural hodgepodge conducive to one-world integration. The Globalists meanwhile are completely at ease with both forces. They lose nothing when Jihad strikes civil society, and may even profit from it. And as to the destruction of national identities, they couldn’t care less. Globalist capitalism strives to make the citizens of the world as similar as possible in order to simplify marketing and trade. The resisting force, that of Conservative Libertarian (often explicitly defined by Beck in religious terms) is thus very much the underdog, outnumbered, outspent and steadily being undone.

While Beck’s theory is imperfect (as any theory on this grand historical scale must be), who can really deny the basic gist of his argument? If the snobs who discount Beck as ‘mad man’ have a better explanation of the political zeitgeist, I would love to hear it.

The very least we can do, as human beings coddled in the luxurious safety of the Western world, is to keep the suffering of those in darker situations in our minds and to prevent it from being buried under passing time.

What is going on in ISIS controlled Syria and Iraq defies credulity and logic. There has been no evil of this intensity, industry and sick creativity since the fall of the Nazi Party. No Soviet Gulag ever concealed the amputation of limbs. The war in Vietnam involved no attempt to impregnate the women of the enemy. Only Hitlerism at its most bestial merits comparison with the Islamic State.

Given how frequent the reports of death and destruction have become, it is only human to feel what popular sociologists call ‘compassion fatigue’; the tiring out of the capacity for shock or sympathy. While understandable, I really think we should fight that emotion. These are real people dying, and their suffering only has meaning if it is known and remembered and if conclusions are drawn from it.

Though Satanic from the get-go, Islamic State’s brutality has become distinctly theatrical of late, almost as if the savages are thrilled by the attention of the civilised world.

Today, polished and clear footage shows bearded militants embracing two blindfolded ‘homosexuals’ (the militants are said to have whispered words of forgiveness to the condemned, no doubt to raise hopes of a stay of execution). Shortly after, they are seen pelting the prisoners with sharp desert stones until their heads lose their shape, and dribble with purple blood. After the bodies stop twitching, the stoning relents, and the gathered throngs disperse.

Days before that, a lion-hearted Syrian who had campaigned locally against ISIS cruelty was made to kneel in the desert and shot point blank. Photographs were released of the murder.

Last week, 30 Ethiopic Christians were beheaded on the shores of Libya by ISIS fighters. Denied the most basic allowance of dignity, footage of their deaths was uploaded to the internet shortly afterwards.

Before that, a video depicted a young thief having his hand sliced off and the stump sown back up by an ISIS ‘doctor’ (if he is one, he disgraces the name of medicine). This insanitary and inhuman practice, relative to the other available retributions should perhaps be considered merciful.

Before this, photographs showed how a long line of Coptic Christians were made to kneel on the Libyan shoreline before being almost simultaneously beheaded, the massive ejaculations of blood from their necks turning the seawater deep red.

If ISIS ever had a point to make, they have surely made it.

It is very difficult to find the right words when talking about this. Terms like ‘savage’ and ‘beastly’ may offer short-term satisfaction, but they seem rather too mild when placed in captions under images like those described above. Even ‘evil’ doesn’t cut it; one must be more specific:

When mothers feel their children are threatened (especially newly born children), they can develop what is known in medicine as ‘hysterical strength’ – a superhuman toughness that is impossible under almost any other circumstance (at its most dramatic, a legend describes women lifting up cars to recover children trapped beneath).

ISIS fighters have achieved a kind of hysterical evil; a malice in excess of ordinary human potential. From its energy, it fuels its own perpetuation. Most people could never overpower their conscience to the degree necessary to behead a man in the morning, and then impregnate his daughter at night.

ISIS fighters are high on evil, thrilled by it, addicted to it, no longer fully in control of it, like rabid dogs. Needless to add, they have ceased to possess any human value and have thereby forfeited all human rights. Every further day they live is an abomination.

Last week, a commenter on this blog stressed how important it was for those concerned with the resurgence of Islam to read the Qur’an in its complete form. He was correct to do so, and his recommendation is sound.

I bought a Qur’an many years ago – the Penguin translation by NJ Dawood – and read most of the Suras in a random order. This was before I started writing about Islam, and my only motivation in visiting the text was to see how intolerant it was against Women. As you’ll know, there is a notorious Sura titled ‘Women’, and this contains most of the references to sexual equality in the whole work. The most famous passage from this chapter is undoubtedly verse 4:34 –

“Men have authority over women because God has made one superior to the other, and because they spend their wealth to maintain them. Good women are obedient. They guard their unseen parts because God has guarded them. As for those from whom you fear disobedience, admonish them, forsake them in beds apart, and beat them. Then if they obey you, take no further action against them”.

It’s strange to think that it was 1400 years ago that some gentleman in the Arabian desert wrote these words, and yet every detail in his articulation now affects over a billion living citizens of the world. The sentence “They guard their unseen parts…” has by-itself chosen the dress for a massive portion of female humanity. That person in the desert, scraping these words onto the bones of an animal, or onto papyrus or stone tablets, decided then what a Muslim woman in Leicester will wear today. Such are the giddying quantum mechanics of history.

As for examples of the promotion of violence, we are rather spoilt for choice. The anti-Islam writer Daniel Pipes collected the following excerpts:

“Regarding infidels (unbelievers), they are the Muslim’s “inveterate enemies” (Sura 4:101). Muslims are to “arrest them, besiege them and lie in ambush everywhere” (Sura 9:5) for them. They are to “seize them and put them to death wherever you find them, kill them wherever you find them, seek out the enemies of Islam relentlessly” (Sura 4:90). “Fight them until Islam reigns supreme” (Sura 2:193). “Cut off their heads, and cut off the tips of their fingers” (Sura 8:12).

I’ve no longer got my copy of the Penguin translation. I think I gave it to Age Concern just before I left for University. I will re-order the same volume and would strongly advise anyone concerned about Islam to order a copy too. It is hugely irritating to have one’s Islamophobia returned with the remark “You don’t know anything about Islam”. That was never true. I discovered as much as I need to about the Islamic religious system many years ago.

Nevertheless, a good knowledge of Qur’anic quotation is vital to successfully conduct a live argument with the faithful. A Muslim does not consider this text as Christians consider the New Testament. Muslims devoutly believe that God wrote the Qur’an and that every sentence must be the absolute truth. Given its purported author, Muslims also hold that it cannot be argued with or re-interpreted. It must be followed without question. This makes Qur’anic criticism by far the most effective means of confronting Islam as a manner of life and thought.